A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (18 016 531)

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council handled a housing benefit overpayment. He says this caused him financial hardship and stress. The Ombudsman is not able to investigate complaints where there is a right to appeal to a tribunal. However, we can investigate how a council administers the process. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for giving Mr X incorrect information about the reason it decided there had been an overpayment. This caused Mr X injustice. The Council has issued a fresh decision notice meaning Mr X has fresh appeal rights. The Council has also apologised to Mr X. The Ombudsman is satisfied that this remedies the injustice to Mr X.

South Staffordshire District Council (19 002 190)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about overpayments of council tax support. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the complainant could have used his appeal rights.

Bath and North East Somerset Council (19 002 443)

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to remove the single person discount from the complainant’s council tax account from 2004. This is because the complainant appealed to the Valuation Tribunal.

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (19 002 652)

Summary: Ms X complains that the Council has sought to recover an overpayment of housing benefit. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there was a right of appeal to a tribunal.

Chiltern District Council (19 002 801)

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council dealt with a recovery of benefit. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because he could have appealed to a tribunal.

London Borough of Lewisham (19 002 919)

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to pay housing benefit. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because he appealed to a tribunal and commenced judicial review proceedings.

London Borough of Ealing (18 010 128)

Summary: Mr B says the Council misled him about the checks it had undertaken on a tenant referred to him, failed to pay him a two-year rent guarantee and failed to check the property for damages. There is no fault in how the Council handled this case.

West Lindsey District Council (18 015 782)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr Q’s complaint about his council tax liability. This is because he may appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. And we are unlikely to find fault with the Council for using enforcement agents to recover unpaid council tax.

Shropshire Council (19 001 452)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to add a storeroom to his rates bill. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because the Valuation Tribunal dealt with Mr X’s appeal about his business rates. Additionally, Mr X has failed to provide the Council with information to allow it to investigate his complaint about officer behaviour.

Wolverhampton City Council (19 002 516)

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint about council tax liability. Mr B has made a late appeal to the independent Valuation Tribunal and the Ombudsman has no power to investigate.

Westminster City Council (18 016 072)

Summary: The Council is not at fault in charging recovery costs of £190 to Mr X for Council Tax arrears of £5.03.

London Borough of Croydon (18 016 757)

Summary: Mr B, complains that following a long history of queries about council tax and benefits, the Council failed to recall a council tax debt from bailiffs when a special payment arrangement was put in place in August 2017. Bailiff action took place as a result, causing distress. The Ombudsman finds there was fault by the Council both in the recovery process and in its complaint handling. That led to injustice for Mr B, for which a remedy has been agreed.

Wyre Borough Council (19 002 431)

Summary: Mrs X complains that the Council has unreasonably pursued council tax enforcement action against her. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there was a right of appeal against any refusal to pay benefits or apply exemptions to council tax. Nor is there evidence of fault by the Council.

Ipswich Borough Council (18 019 416)

Summary: Mr X complains about the council tax bills issued to him on a property he lets. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault and Mr X had a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal. Part of the matter is also out of time.

London Borough of Bexley (19 002 072)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about her council tax account. This is because the Council may be able to provide the outcome she is seeking.

Manchester City Council (19 002 177)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this council tax complaint from a landlord regarding a rented property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

London Borough of Croydon (19 002 755)

Summary: Mrs X complains about the way the Council has considered her applications for council tax support. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there was a right of appeal for any dispute about entitlement and there is insufficient injustice from the delay to warrant investigation.

Ashford Borough Council (19 002 836)

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council is wrongly holding him responsible for unpaid business rates. This is because Mr X’s liability has been established at court.

London Borough of Southwark (19 001 847)

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment. This is because the complainant made a late appeal to the tribunal and because he could have made an on-time appeal to the tribunal.

London Borough of Merton (19 001 888)

Summary: Mr X complains about his council tax liability. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the matter is out of time and there was a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

London Borough of Brent (19 002 030)

Summary: Mr X complains about a data breach by the Council in its handling of his council tax account. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider what took place and whether the Council needs to take action in relation to information access in this area.

Isle of Wight Council (19 002 173)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B complaint about the way the Council dealt with her housing benefit claim. This is because it was reasonable to expect her to pursue her right of appeal to the First Tier Tribunal.

Westminster City Council (19 002 206)

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his Council Tax debt and the additional costs he incurred. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because the matters about which Mr X complains happened too long ago for the Ombudsman to investigate them now and so the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction.

Mendip District Council (19 002 346)

Summary: Mrs X complains that the Council delayed determining her council tax liability on a property. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the Council has made a reasonable offer to remedy the matter.