A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

Medway Council (19 003 248)

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council has failed to take into account his evidence of expenses and income for his council tax and housing benefit applications. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because he had a right of appeal to a tribunal.

Luton Borough Council (19 003 595)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about incorrect information provided to the complainant about his Council Tax account. This is because the Council has provided a proportionate response and there is not enough remaining injustice to start an investigation.

North West Leicestershire District Council (19 003 797)

Summary: Mrs X complains that the Council did not advise her of a council tax discount for mental impairment. She also complains that the Council did not consider her income when determining a repayment of council tax. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because she accepts that she would not have been entitled to the discount. Further, the Council offered her the opportunity to seek a review of the repayment rate and so there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Test Valley Borough Council (19 003 961)

Summary: Mr X complains that he suffered stress from the Council’s decision to send him a business rates bill for a property for which he was not liable. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the matter has been resolved and there is no evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

London Borough of Camden (19 004 240)

Summary: Mr B complains about the Council and the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) concerning matters relating to his company’s liability for business rates. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because the VOA is a central government agency and not within our jurisdiction and the availability of appeal rights to the Valuation Tribunal places the complaint against the Council outside our jurisdiction.

London Borough of Lewisham (18 013 422)

Summary: Mr B complains about enforcement action for a council tax debt, after the Valuation Office Agency changed the status of a property he owns. The Ombudsman upholds the complaint because of a delay in dealing with information that Mr B did not receive mail sent to his contact address. But this did not cause Mr B a significant injustice. It is reasonable to have expected him to keep the Council informed of correct contact details. And the Council later made his tenants liable and waived summons costs.

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council (19 003 429)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the Council’s action in pursuing her for council tax arrears. The complaint falls outside our jurisdiction because Ms B has appeal rights to the Valuation Tribunal to challenge the Council’s decisions.

Worthing Borough Council (18 017 571)

Summary: Miss B complains the Council deducted money from her earnings without notice. She says this left her in financial hardship and the Council did not properly consider her circumstances. The Ombudsman finds fault in how the Council managed the recovery of housing benefit overpayments from Miss B. This caused injustice to Miss B and we recommend the Council apologise, pay Miss B for distress and time and trouble and remind its officers of guidance on use of direct earnings attachments.

London Borough of Harrow (18 011 868)

Summary: Ms C complains on behalf of her mother about the Council’s application of a student discount on her council tax account. We uphold the complaint, finding fault in some of the Council’s administrative actions and communications around this matter. This caused Ms C’s mother unnecessary distress, time and trouble. At the end of this statement, we explain action the Council has agreed to take to remedy the complaint.

Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (19 002 916)

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council taking recovery action against her for unpaid council tax on two properties she owns. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Miss X has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal which is the proper authority to consider appeals about reductions, discounts and exemptions from council tax liability.

Bolsover District Council (19 003 062)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to deal properly with his complaint that a housing benefit officer made threats when suggesting the landlord should reduce the tenants’ rent. There is no injustice to Mr X or the housing provider he represents. It would not be a good use of limited public resources to investigate.

Burnley Borough Council (19 003 102)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about council tax and council tax support. This is because it is a late complaint and because there were appeal rights the complainant could have used.

London Borough of Lambeth (19 003 410)

Summary: The Ombudsman does not propose to investigate Miss X’s complaint about an alleged overpayment of benefits. This is because it is reasonable for Miss X to use the appeal rights available to her.

Leeds City Council (19 003 495)

Summary: The Ombudsman will investigate Mr B’s complaint about his council tax account. This is because the Council has now taken the action Mr B requested and it is not unreasonable to expect him to use his right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal if he disagrees with the Council’s adjusted decision on his council tax liability.

Braintree District Council (18 012 076)

Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council has handled her council tax arrears. She says it has caused stress and anxiety, increased costs due to passing the debt to bailiffs, and affected her work. She also says bailiffs caused £300 worth of damage to her front door. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council.

Leicester City Council (18 013 518)

Summary: Mr X complains about delay by the Council in notifying his company of a business rates liability. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because any dispute is for the courts.

Birmingham City Council (19 003 323)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the council tax single person discount. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.