IRRV Alert - week ending 27th December 2020
News
Reports
New benefits and taxation decisions
|
||||
|
|
||||
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. Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council (20 002 849)
Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about council tax arrears. This is because the complaint has already been considered in court, and because the complaint is late. Leeds City Council (20 002 908)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that the Council should not have held her liable for council tax at three separate addresses after April 2011 but it has failed to refund the amounts she has paid. This is because it was reasonable to expect Miss B to pursue her right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal Surrey Heath Borough Council (20 003 146)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to apply for a liability order for council tax arrears. This is because an investigation is unlikely to find fault causing significant injustice to the complainant. St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (20 003 334)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council gave inaccurate advice causing the complainant to suffer a financial loss. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Hertsmere Borough Council (20 002 915)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that the Council failed to support her with her application for housing benefit in 2015 and failed to backdate the benefit. This is because we could not now investigate her complaint effectively and it was reasonable to expect her to use her right of appeal to the First Tier Tribunal. Birmingham City Council (20 004 024)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about Council Tax liability. This is because it is reasonable to expect Ms B to use her right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal against the Council’s decision. London Borough of Brent (19 011 947)
Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to re-issue a crisis grant for white goods which she was awarded in 2018. The Ombudsman should not exercise his discretion to investigate this complaint. This is because it was received outside the normal 12-month period for receiving complaints. London Borough of Barnet (19 013 518)
Summary: Miss B complains the Council wrongly applied payments she made to previous arrears. She says the Council issued a court summons and liability order for her council tax as a first resort, causing her distress. The Ombudsman does not find fault in how the Council applied Miss B’s payments or in issuing court proceedings. However, we find fault in the Council’s complaint response and recommend it pay Miss B £100. Birmingham City Council (19 013 842)
Summary: The Ombudsman does not find fault with the way the Council handled Miss B’s request for a special payment arrangement in respect of her council tax debt. There was also no fault with the way the Council handled Miss B’s complaint or communicated with her about these matters. Luton Borough Council (19 017 075)
Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint, about the Council’s handling of the complainant’s Council Tax. This is because she has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal, which means the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to consider it. Cheshire East Council (20 003 815)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council requires the complainant to pay council tax, at the full rate, for a property she does not live in. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. London Borough of Harrow (20 003 876)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about Council Tax liability. This is because it is reasonable to expect Ms B to use her right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal against the Council’s decision. London Borough of Lambeth (20 002 635)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council calculated the complainant’s housing benefit and council tax support. This is because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal. South Oxfordshire District Council (20 003 277)
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this housing benefit complaint from a landlord. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.
|
