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 Croydon (20 002 468)

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to respond to his complaint about matters relating to council tax arrears from a property he used to live in. We will not investigate the complaint because it appears to be a late complaint and because there has been no fault by the Council in failing to address a complaint which Mr X has not yet made to it.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 300)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 302)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 304)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 308)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 313)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 315)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 317)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 318)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 319)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 322)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

London Borough of Lewisham (20 013 336)

Summary: There was no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with Mr X’s request to appeal its housing benefit decision.

Somerset West and Taunton Council (20 014 266)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council has calculated the complainant’s Council Tax Support. This is because the complainant could appeal to the Valuation Tribunal or speak to his local councillors if he thinks the CTS policy is wrong.

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (21 003 368)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the handling of his council tax arrears payment plan, an application for discretionary council tax relief and the reply to his complaint. The Council has not caused Mr X injustice and investigation is not likely to lead to a different outcome.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (21 003 777)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about business rates liability. The court granted a liability order to the Council in 2018 and although Mr X has disputed the rates liability since then we cannot consider the court’s decision now.

London Borough of Hillingdon (20 004 324)

Summary: Mr B complained the Council did not pay his business a small business grant to support businesses impacted by COVID-19. We do not find fault in the Council’s decision.

Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (21 000 774)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not giving Miss X a self-isolation support payment.

Isle of Wight Council (21 003 523)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has applied an empty property council tax premium. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

Crawley Borough Council (21 003 776)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax as it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to use her right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Telford & Wrekin Council (21 005 447)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to reduce the complainant’s council tax to account for services he says he has not received. This is because we have seen no evidence of fault in the Council’s refusal to reduce his council tax payments or refusal to compensate him.

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (20 010 532)

Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council decided to refuse Mrs X a COVID-19 business grant.

London Borough of Barnet (21 002 409)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment because the complainant could have used her appeal rights. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Wakefield City Council (21 003 337)

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council pursuing her for a 2019 council tax debt. There is insufficient evidence of Council fault.

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (21 003 349)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a grant for businesses affected by COVID-19. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

Nottingham City Council (20 003 736)

Summary: Mr Z, on behalf of Ms X, complained the Council did not pay her any of the Small Business Grant she was jointly entitled to which caused her financial difficulties. The Council paid the full Small Business Grant to Miss Y who was jointly and severally liable for the rent and business rates with Ms X. We find fault in the Council’s failure to seek written confirmation from all parties to pay the grant to Miss Y who would then split it with Ms X. The Council has agreed to pay Ms X an amount equivalent to half of the grant as well as a payment for distress.

Ashford Borough Council (20 010 801)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about incorrectly charged council tax. This is because it is reasonable for Mr Y to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if he disputes liability.

Westminster City Council (21 003 498)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s benefit claims. This is because the Council’s response to it already represents a reasonable and proportionate outcome.

Chesterfield Borough Council (21 003 680)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint that the Council include the Police and Crime Commissioner precept on the Council’s council tax bills. This is because we cannot investigate matters that affect all or most of the people in a council’s area.

Blackburn with Darwen Council (21 005 585)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to hold the complainant liable for unpaid council tax. This is because it is reasonable to expect her to complain to the Valuation Tribunal which is the most appropriate body to consider the complaint.

London Borough of Merton (20 009 370)

Summary: Miss B complains about enforcement agents disposing of items seized from her property for Council Tax debt. She says the Council failed to reimburse her the full value of the items. We discontinued our investigation into Miss B’s complaint because we are satisfied with the Council’s proposed actions.