|
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.
West Oxfordshire District Council (21 013 658)
Summary: Ms Y complained the Council wrongly accused Mr X of fraud and was poor in its communications in reviewing his test and trace support payment causing distress, time and trouble. We have found no fault by the Council.
London Borough of Southwark (22 000 357)
Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about the Council’s decision to make some, but not all, residents of a marina liable for council tax in 2015. There is not a good reason Miss X did not complain to us sooner.
London Borough of Lambeth (21 010 932)
Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with her claims for Council Tax Support causing her distress and financial difficulties. We found the Council was at fault in the way it responded to Ms X’s complaints about the matter as it did not issue a final complaint response to her. But this fault has not caused Ms X an injustice. We found no evidence of fault in the Council’s overall management of her claims. We will not investigate whether Ms X is eligible for Council Tax Support as it would be reasonable for Ms X to appeal to the Council and then to the Valuation Tribunal. So, we have completed our investigation.
London Borough of Haringey (21 011 020)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the recovery of business rate and council tax debts. This is because the matter has been subject to court proceedings. There is insufficient fault leading to a significant injustice with how the Council communicate with the complainant about the debts and it is reasonable to expect them to complaint to the Information Commissioner about a data breach.
Hartlepool Borough Council (21 011 869)
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his council tax accounts. He was unhappy about an attachment of earnings order, liability for council tax bills, fairness over joint liability and lack of empathy by a Council officer. The Council was not at fault with the way the Council handled Mr X’s council tax accounts or communicated with him about these matters.
London Borough of Brent (22 000 177)
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about council tax because it involves court action which started when the Council issued a summons for unpaid council tax. There is also not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s enforcement and recovery action to warrant an investigation. Part of the complaint is late, and there are no good reasons to exercise our discretion and investigate it.
North Somerset Council (22 000 021)
Summary: Mr X complains that the Council has not provided him with a detailed breakdown of his council tax bill. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault and the Ombudsman cannot investigate a matter which has been appealed to a Valuation Tribunal.
London Borough of Harrow (22 000 470)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay in dealing with a council tax exemption request as the matter can be considered by a Valuation Tribunal.
London Borough of Bexley (21 019 093)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award Discretionary Housing Payments. This is because the Council reviewed and changed its decision during our consideration of the complaint.
Bristol City Council (21 011 180)
Summary: Mr X complains the Council delayed in issuing a council tax bill for his new home and made unnecessary, intrusive enquiries when assessing a claim for council tax reduction. Mr X also says he was given misleading and incorrect information. We have not found fault with the Council’s actions.
London Borough of Hounslow (21 018 338)
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council has demanded council tax from 2004-08 due to its error in paying a discount. The complaint is resolved because the Council has written off the debt which is a fair outcome.
|
