IRRV Alert - week ending 28th October 2022
Information Letters
News
Circulars
New benefits and taxation decisions
|
|
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 Hounslow (22 006 545)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the complainant’s housing benefit is constantly changing even though his income does not change. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the complainant could have used his review and appeal rights. Basildon Borough Council (22 007 499)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council was negligent in handling his council tax account, failed to help him remove his property from the council tax list, and wrongly obtained a bankruptcy order against him for a council tax debt causing significant financial loss. Mr X has or had a legal remedy at court which it is reasonable for him to use. He complains late outside the permitted period of 12 months. Maidstone Borough Council (22 006 469)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about money taken from the complainant’s bank account in error, by the Council, for council tax. This is because the Council provided an appropriate response and there is insufficient evidence of injustice. Adur District Council (22 005 537)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to process a change of circumstance relating to council tax which resulted in the complainant being contacted by bailiffs. This is because the Council has agreed to pay £150 to the complainant. Manchester City Council (22 006 887)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to take bankruptcy proceedings against Ms X for her unpaid council tax. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons for why Ms X could not have complained earlier. East Riding of Yorkshire Council (22 006 508)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a dispute over liability for council tax. This is because the complainant can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. London Borough of Lambeth (21 012 515)
Summary: Ms X complained the Council took enforcement action prematurely and passed a debt to an enforcement agent. Ms X says she incurred debt collection charges and experienced distress because of the Council’s action. We found fault with the Council for passing the debt over to enforcement agents. The Council agreed to our recommendations to recall the debt from its enforcement agents, remove any enforcement agent fees and pay Ms X £100 for the inconvenience, distress and frustration caused. London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (22 000 463)
Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly pursued recovery action against him while his council tax appeal was ongoing. There were delays in the Council’s processes which caused Mr X avoidable distress. However, the Council had already apologised to Mr X, and this was sufficient to remedy the injustice caused. Darlington Borough Council (22 000 890)
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council’s poor handling of the COVID-19 grant schemes meant she missed out on business support worth £40,000 and was put to time and trouble chasing the Council. We found no fault by the Council. London Borough of Brent (22 005 140)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s council tax arrears. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council tax banding change. This is because it is unlikely that we would find fault. It is reasonable to expect Miss Y to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal, and any remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant our investigation. London Borough of Bromley (22 006 817)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about recovery action taken by the Council in respect of a business rates debt as there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks. Chichester District Council (22 006 306)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council conducted an interview and its subsequent decision to cancel the complainant’s benefits. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and the complainant can use her appeal rights.
|
