A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

Durham County Council (18 001 943)

Summary: I found no fault in the way the Council reached the decision to put Mr X on its register of potentially violent persons and considered his appeal. I did not investigate other parts of Mr X’s complaint about Council Tax matters.

London Borough of Bromley (18 010 798)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to reduce the complainant’s entitlement to housing benefit. The complainant has a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Birmingham City Council (18 016 102)

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council failed to set up a direct debit for him to pay council tax. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council causing significant injustice.

Salford City Council (18 016 598)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaints about the Council’s actions relating to council tax liability and a breach of the Data Protection Act. Mr B has instigated court proceedings against the Council and the Ombudsman cannot investigate a matter that is the subject of court proceedings. And if the Council decides Mr B is liable for the council tax, it is reasonable to expect Mr B to use his right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (18 016 939)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council handling of his council tax account in respect of an empty property discount. The Ombudsman cannot add to what the Council has said or achieve the outcome Mr Y wants which is for his original discount to still apply. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to ask the Valuation Tribunal to determine what discount should apply. The complaint is therefore outside the Ombudsman’s legal remit.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (18 017 100)

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council refused to apply a single occupancy discount to a property he owns. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because this is a matter for the Valuation Tribunal.

Richmondshire District Council (18 012 643)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about council tax liability as it is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. The complaint is therefore outside the Ombudsman’s legal remit.

London Borough of Islington (18 003 304)

Summary: Mr D complains the Council’s delay and inconsistent treatment of his expenses in its housing benefit calculation caused him hardship. The Ombudsman considers there is fault by the Council because it delayed submitting an appeal to the Tribunal. However, as the Tribunal has dismissed Mr D’s appeal I have not recommended a financial remedy as there is no significant injustice.

Birmingham City Council (18 006 650)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council taking recovery action for council tax arrears. He disputes his liability for the debts. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because it was reasonable for Mr X to appeal issues about liability to the Valuation Tribunal which is the proper authority to consider these matters.

Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (18 010 509)

Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of his brother, Mr Y, about the way the Council calculated Mr Y’s contribution to the cost of his care. Mr X disagrees with the way the Council has charged Mr Y for unpaid care costs. Mr X says Mr Y has been overcharged for services. Mr X says this situation has cost him time and trouble, inconvenience, and caused him frustration. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council’s actions.

Sheffield City Council (18 016 739)

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council unreasonably delayed refunding deductions from his benefits. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council causing significant injustice.

Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (18 015 736)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment which the Council raised in 2015. This is because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal and because it is a late complaint.

London Borough of Newham (18 016 704)

Summary: Mr X (a landlord) complains that the Council has held him liable for council tax on a property he let. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because this is a matter for the Valuation Tribunal.

Birmingham City Council (17 007 333)

Summary: Ms B complains that the Council has failed to fully compensate the costs she incurred following a housing benefit underpayment. The Ombudsman finds the Council gave Ms B inaccurate information, disregarded her childcare costs from October 2017 resulting in a housing benefit underpayment and delayed in responding to Ms B’s complaint. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice suffered by Ms B.

Coventry City Council (17 012 468)

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about liability for council tax. The complainant has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal against the Council’s decision that he is liable.

London Borough of Barnet (18 015 081)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal of an application for a council tax reduction. The complainant has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal against the Council’s decision.

Leeds City Council (18 016 610)

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council recovering an overpayment of housing benefit and council tax which was placed on her claim in 2015. The Ombudsman should not exercise his discretion to investigate this complaint which was received outside the normal 12-month period for receiving complaints. It was reasonable for Mrs X to appeal the overpayment decision to the independent benefits tribunal at the time.

Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council (18 016 645)

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council has been unreasonable in refusing to accept his offer of payments of arrears of council tax. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Warwickshire County Council (18 017 113)

Summary: Mr X complained about the failure of the Council to merge with the District Council to form a unitary authority. He says the current arrangement of separate authorities is expensive and inefficient. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. It concerns matters which affect all or most of the authority’s inhabitants and is outside his jurisdiction.

Warwick District Council (18 017 116)

Summary: Mr X complained about the failure of the Council to merge with the County Council to form a unitary authority. He says the current arrangement of separate authorities is expensive and inefficient. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. It concerns matters which affect all or most of the authority’s inhabitants and is outside his jurisdiction.

Eastbourne Borough Council (18 018 521)

Summary: Mrs X no longer wishes to pursue her complaint about customer service issues at the Council as she says the Council has apologised. The Ombudsman will not therefore investigate.