IRRV Alert - week ending 17th January 2020
Information Letters
News
Circulars
Publicity
New benefits and taxation decisions
|
||||
|
|
||||
A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions |
||||
|
Birmingham City Council (18 017 592)
Summary: In dealing with a Housing Benefit claim the Council made many significant mistakes. In particular, it failed to consider relevant information, delayed, and failed properly to deal with an appeal. It caused injustice to the complainant in unnecessary distress, time and trouble. To put this right the Council will reassess the claim for the time the complainant was not employed and pay her £600 for the injustice it caused her. Broxbourne Borough Council (19 008 370)
Summary: Mr X complains that the Council took enforcement action against him for council tax arrears whilst the matter was in dispute at the Valuation Tribunal. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council. London Borough of Redbridge (18 018 255)
Summary: Mrs J complains the Council pursued recovery of council tax when her home became uninhabitable after the Council carried out works to the estate. She says it should apply a council tax reduction and discounts. There is fault by the Council for which it has provided an appropriate remedy. Broxtowe Borough Council (19 007 483)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that another resident pays significantly less council tax than he does as Mr X is not caused a direct injustice from this. If Mr X’s feels the Council is charging him too much council tax, he has the right to appeal against the Council’s decision to the Valuation Tribunal. Chichester District Council (19 008 001)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about council tax. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot investigate decisions taken in court. Telford & Wrekin Council (19 008 531)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the amount the Council says the complainant owes for unpaid council tax. This is because it is unlikely he will find fault by the Council. The complainant also had the right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. London Borough of Waltham Forest (19 007 861)
Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with her council tax account. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the matter has been settled to the Ombudsman’s satisfaction. London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (19 008 072)
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decisions to hold him liable for council tax. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there was a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal. London Borough of Hounslow (18 017 308)
Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment because the complainant appealed to the tribunal. In addition, it is a late complaint and there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Salford City Council (19 003 439)
Summary: Ms B complained that the Council paid housing benefit to her tenant in error and then refused to refund the money. The Council has now paid Ms B so the complaint is resolved. Hartlepool Borough Council (19 007 757)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about housing benefit overpayments because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal. Leicester City Council (19 007 847)
Summary: Mr X complains that the Council has sought council tax enforcement costs, despite his successful Valuation Tribunal appeal. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council. Wolverhampton City Council (19 007 865)
Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council dealt with his payments towards council tax. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient injustice to warrant investigation. Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (19 008 064)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council responded to the complainant’s request to cancel a direct debit. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. King's Lynn & West Norfolk Council (19 006 880)
Summary: Mr X complained there were delays in the Council paying his housing benefit. Mr X says his housing benefit is now being paid and he no longer wishes to pursue his complaint. The Ombudsman has discontinued the investigation into Mr X’s complaint.
|
