A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

Please note: our decisions are published three months after they are issued to councils, care providers and the person who has made the complaint. The cases below reflect the caselaw and guidance available at the time of issue and the individual circumstances of each case.

Somerset West and Taunton Council (19 015 456)

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has taken action to recover council tax that he already paid. He says he has incurred legal costs and been put to avoidable time and trouble trying to resolve this matter. The evidence seen shows there is one disputed payment and the Council has proposed a way to resolve this. As Mr X has other arrears, there is no fault in the Council taking recovery action.

Wealden District Council (19 015 643)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council ending its service for accepting cheque payments for Council services in 2019. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Bath and North East Somerset Council (20 002 169)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council has not processed a claim for housing benefit that the complainant made in 2018. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Watford Borough Council (18 017 040)

Summary: The Council was at fault in the way it dealt with Mr and Mrs X’s benefit claims. The Council has apologised and made several service improvements. Mr and Mrs X say the Council was malicious in its actions. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of further fault by the Council but has asked it to make a financial payment for the distress and uncertainty caused to Mr and Mrs X.

London Borough of Merton (20 000 581)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint about Housing Benefit reduction. This is because it is reasonable for Miss B to ask for a Council review or appeal so we could not achieve any worthwhile outcome by starting an investigation.

Rother District Council (19 018 835)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about her council tax bill. This is because part of the complaint is late, and it is reasonable for Mrs X to use the appeal rights available to her.

London Borough of Brent (19 004 673)

Summary: Ms X complains that the Council has made errors with her Council Tax Bill. The Council is not at fault as it credited the payments made by Ms X to her Council Tax account and provided a statement of payments to her. The Council is at fault as it did not clearly notify Ms X of right to request a review of its decision to remove a student disregard and right to appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. As a result, Ms X lost the opportunity to challenge the Council’s decision at the time it was made. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice to Ms X by notifying her of her right to request a review of the decision and appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

London Borough of Haringey (20 001 245)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about council tax arrears from 2017. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Herefordshire Council (20 001 508)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this council tax complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the issues need to be determined by the Valuation Office.

London Borough of Islington (20 001 979)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to backdate the council tax single person discount to 2003. This is because the Council has decided to backdate the discount to 2003.

North Somerset Council (19 004 348)

Summary: Miss B complains about the way the Council has dealt with recover of council tax arrears. There was delay in processing Miss B’s council tax support claim, which led the Council to take unnecessary court action to recover arrears. The Council has since corrected the amounts owed and agreed to make a payment to offset against the arrears Miss B still owes as a further remedy to the injustice caused.

Wealden District Council (19 008 606)

Summary: Mr X complains the Council unfairly refused his application for a Discretionary Hardship Payment (DHP) and Exceptional Hardship Payment (EHP). He says this meant he had less money every month after he had paid his bills. Mr X appealed the EHP refusal to a Valuation Tribunal so this part of the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. There was no fault in the Council’s consideration of the DHP application.

Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (19 019 463)

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this housing benefit complaint. This is because the complainant appealed to the tribunal and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (19 019 484)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that a Council officer wrongly told him he did not need to pay council tax on an empty property. There is no fault in the Council requiring Mr X to pay council tax for which he is liable. Its offer of £50 in recognition that better advice should have been given is a fair remedy.

Medway Council (20 000 214)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a council tax exemption for severe mental impairment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because it is a late complaint.

Trafford Council (20 001 419)

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this housing benefit complaint because the complainant has appealed to a tribunal.

Birmingham City Council (20 001 547)

Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not tell him he could pay his council tax over 12 months instead of 10 months. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault or injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.

Torridge District Council (20 001 808)

Summary: The Ombudsman will investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s request to remove a property from council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.