A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

Salford City Council (18 004 761)

Summary: Mr D complains about the Council’s recovery action for Council Tax and Housing Benefit debts. The Ombudsman has found fault with both issues, because of problems with holding recovery and sending communications to the wrong address. But the Council has accepted fault and offered Mr D repayment arrangements that are more generous than usual standard schedules. The Ombudsman’s view is this means there is insufficient injustice to warrant a further remedy.

Harrogate Borough Council (18 009 591)

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council has recovered outstanding council tax from him. We find fault by the Council in some of its consideration about whether to take bankruptcy proceedings or seek a charging order to secure its debt. This has caused some injustice to Mr X as uncertainty. The Council has therefore agreed to further consider the affordability of any payments Mr X can make towards his debt and reconsider its existing recovery protocol.

London Borough of Lambeth (18 012 918)

Summary: Miss B complains the Council wrongly reduced her housing benefit for seven months. Miss B says she fell into rent arrears and received a notice of possession for her home. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for reducing Miss B’s housing benefit. The Council agrees to apologise and pay Miss B for time and trouble, and distress caused by the fault.

Copeland Borough Council (18 018 068)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this council tax complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

North Somerset Council (18 019 312)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment from 2004. This is because it is late complaint.

Northumberland Council (18 019 650)

Summary: Mr X disputes his liability for either council tax or business rates on a property he formerly leased. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because this is a matter for either the Valuation Tribunal or the courts.

Westminster City Council (18 017 249)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about summons costs added to his council tax account. Mr B has confirmed the matter is resolved as the Council has withdrawn the costs as a goodwill gesture.

Cheshire East Council (18 019 324)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to charge extra council tax on an empty property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the level of council tax can only be challenged in court. In addition, the complainant could appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Winchester City Council (18 019 400)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about overpaid council tax reduction. This is because it is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (18 014 769)

Summary: Mr B complains about how the Council dealt with his claim for Housing Benefit when he was a full-time student, and his correspondence and appeal since then. The Ombudsman finds there was minor fault by the Council in that it asked him to provide information he had already provided. This caused frustration and inconvenience for which an apology is recommended.

Leicester City Council (18 018 405)

Summary: A housing benefit claimant complained that the Council had repeatedly used incorrect information in assessing her claim. But the Ombudsman cannot investigate this matter because the claimant has appealed to a tribunal about the Council’s benefit decisions in her case.

High Peak Borough Council (18 018 999)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint from a landlord about liability for council tax. This is because the complainant can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

South Somerset District Council (18 019 106)

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision not to award a council tax exemption or discount to her mother’s home whilst her mother resides in a care home. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

Durham County Council (18 019 171)

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council dealt with his council tax liability. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the matter has been remedied by the Council as it has withdrawn the Liability Order and waived the costs.

Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (18 018 685)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council sent Council Tax enforcement documents to the wrong address. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

London Borough of Haringey (18 018 843)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about council tax arrears and bankruptcy. This is because it is a late complaint and because the complainant can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

Preston City Council (18 018 975)

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s refusal of her application for a discount or exemption from council tax. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because it was reasonable for her to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal which is the proper authority to consider disputes appeals about council tax liability.

Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council (18 019 190)

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about an increase in council tax and a reduction in services. This is because the law says the Ombudsman cannot investigate something that affects most of the people living in a council area and he has no power to change the level of council tax.