|
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.
King's Lynn & West Norfolk Council (19 011 113)
Summary: There is no evidence of fault by the Council in its handling of Mr X’s council tax account for an empty property.
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (20 000 774)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a council tax bill for an empty property. This is because Mr X had appeal rights on the substantive part of the complaint and there is insufficient evidence of fault on the other matter.
Birmingham City Council (20 002 131)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about an error the Council made in setting up the complainant’s council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.
Plymouth City Council (19 007 393)
Summary: Mr X complains the Council pursued him for unpaid council tax despite knowing he had paid. The Council has previously accepted it acted with fault, but it failed to also consider whether Mr X and his wife were vulnerable and failed to propose a suitable remedy to their complaint. The Council will apologise to Mr X and offer a financial remedy for the distress it caused. It will also provide further training to staff.
London Borough of Haringey (19 017 814)
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council billing him for council tax for an address which he says he does not live at. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X appealed the liability for the property in 2017 to the Valuation Tribunal which is the proper authority to decide liability. The Ombudsman cannot investigate where a complainant has used an alternative remedy to appeal.
London Borough of Hackney (20 000 837)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to pay a woman’s claims for housing benefit, and about the way it dealt with her when she became homeless. This is mainly because the woman has complained late about these matters. She also had the right to go to a tribunal about the Council’s housing benefit decisions.
Slough Borough Council (20 001 462)
Summary: Mr X complains about various matters concerning data protection issues and that the Council has not properly dealt with his complaint. The Ombudsman will not investigate as these are matters for the Information Commissioner’s Office.
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 001 833)
Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint that the Council wrongly cancelled the complainant’s council tax reduction from 2010 to 2018. This is because the complainant has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal.
Huntingdonshire District Council (20 002 396)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to waive some council tax after it made an error. This is because the Council has offered a fair remedy.
Trafford Council (19 007 725)
Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council assessed her housing benefit and council tax support. She said this caused her stress and financial loss. There was fault in the Council’s actions when it failed to review Ms X’s claim for a discretionary housing payment. Ms X has since qualified for full housing benefit and has no outstanding injustice because of this. Ms X had a right of appeal about her housing benefit and appealed the Council’s decision regarding council tax support to tribunal, the Ombudsman will not investigate this part of her complaint. There was fault in the Council’s actions when it did not offer Ms X appeal rights after it rejected her claim for discretionary council tax support. The Council has agreed to make a payment of £150 to Ms X and has reminded its staff to ensure they make applicants aware of their right of appeal.
North East Derbyshire District Council (19 015 495)
Summary: Mr X complained the Council bullied and harassed him in relation to benefits claims, and wrongly applied for an anti-social behaviour injunction against him. We will not investigate this complaint. We cannot investigate decisions made by the courts, and it is unlikely we would find fault in the central issue about housing benefit and council tax support.
Tamworth Borough Council (20 000 470)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a refund for business rates. This is because it is a late complaint and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to consider it now.
Isle of Wight Council (20 001 273)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has stopped his council tax support. The complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because Mr X can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal. The Council’s council tax support policy can only be challenged at court.
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (20 001 429)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council assesses claims for council tax reduction. This is because the Council has offered a fair remedy and because the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome the complainant would like.
London Borough of Haringey (19 019 694)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that the Council has failed to allocate council tax payments to her account and that its communication with her was poor. The Council took appropriate action including apologising to Ms X for its initial failings. There is no remaining injustice.
Wealden District Council (20 001 905)
Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about the Council’s investigation of their circumstances when they made a claim for council tax support. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council.
Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (19 016 234)
Summary: Miss X had to keep providing information to the Council because of a problem with its online system. As it did not think Miss X had provided the information, the Council ended Miss X’s benefit claims. It then wrongly advised Miss X to claim Universal Credit so she lost her working tax credit. The Council has since made up the financial difference to Miss X through Direct Housing and Hardship payments. However, from March to late September Miss X was in dire financial circumstances. The Council will apologise to her and provide a payment for the distress, time, and trouble it caused.
Fenland District Council (20 001 191)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal of a claim for council tax support. This because the person complaining has a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal about the Council’s decision.
London Borough of Lambeth (20 001 856)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a difficulty the complainant had in getting a council tax refund or transfer. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.
|
