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.

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (22 017 337)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax arrears and bailiff action. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the Council has provided a fair response.

Wyre Forest District Council (23 003 439)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council wrongly told the complainant he could not set up a payment plan for council tax arrears and delayed replying to an email. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Cheshire West & Chester Council (23 004 094)

Summary: A man complained that the Council had wrongly applied legislation regarding an empty homes premium charge for council tax in his partner’s case. But we will not investigate this matter because the property owner could have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal if she felt the charging decision was wrong.

East Riding of Yorkshire Council (23 004 154)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s COVID-19 grant scheme. This is because the complaint is late and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

London Borough of Tower Hamlets (23 004 281)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award a council tax discount to Mr X as he can appeal against this decision to the Valuation Tribunal.

London Borough of Haringey (23 004 723)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to hold Miss X liable for council tax as she can appeal against this to the Valuation Tribunal.

Norwich City Council (22 012 246)

Summary: We found fault by the Council on Miss K’s complaint of it cancelling her council tax direct debit and account. It failed to provide some evidence, delayed acting on her concern about suspected fraud, and delayed giving her a full explanation of what happened. It also delayed reinstating her account. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Birmingham City Council (22 015 541)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s creation of housing benefit overpayments which were made on Miss X’s rent account. It was reasonable for her to challenge them by appealing to the independent benefits tribunal. We will not exercise discretion to consider her complaint that a compensation payment was paid into her rent account which was in arrears against her wishes. This complaint which was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.

Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (22 017 067)

Summary: Miss C complained about the actions of the Council in dealing with her council tax accounts while she was waiting for her house to be completed. She says the Council ignored her evidence that she moved into the property in April 2022, not April 2021, wrongly taken money from her bank account and continued to recover the money without justification. We found the Council should have sent her a formal decision, with reasons and a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. The Council has agreed to issue a decision now, hold off recovery until the appeal is decided and pay her £100.

Torbay Council (23 002 436)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to pay interest on a council tax refund. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot investigate the actions of the Valuation Office Agency.

Blaby District Council (23 002 780)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to recover council tax debt through an attachment of earnings order. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

London Borough of Bexley (23 003 891)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to award another Discretionary Housing Payment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Derbyshire Dales District Council (23 004 329)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council tax premiums because he could appeal to a Valuation Tribunal or seek a review by the Valuation Office Agency.

Liverpool City Council (22 015 738)

Summary: Mr X complained the Council was responsible for a significant delay deciding his application for a COVID-19 discretionary business grant, and did not respond to his requests for updates. Mr X also complained about being charged council tax, and about the Council’s complaint procedure. The Council was at fault for delays resulting from its poor communication with Mr X. The Council was not at fault for charging Mr X council tax, or over its complaint procedure.

Birmingham City Council (23 003 916)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint that the Council wrongly took money from the complainant and has refused to refund it. This is because we cannot investigate the actions of the Housing Service and because this is a late complaint. In addition, there were appeal rights the complainant could have used.

London Borough of Brent (23 003 988)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council bullied Ms X between 2016 and 2017 when communicating with her about housing benefit. That is because the complaint is late. We will also not investigate Ms X’s complaint about overpayment of housing benefit. That is because the Council has referred her appeal to the Social Entitlement Tribunal.

London Borough of Lewisham (23 004 321)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of Mr X’s claims for housing benefit and council tax reduction. This is because we would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (23 003 753)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the complainant did not receive a court summons regarding council tax arrears. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

London Borough of Croydon (22 017 577)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to take recovery action on Ms X’s council tax account. This is because we would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.