A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

London Borough of Haringey (18 015 518)

Summary:  Ms X complains the Council miscalculated her housing benefit and council tax entitlement, leading to her eviction by her private landlord. She also says that the Council failed in its duty to house her, causing her and her family distress.

London Borough of Bexley (19 001 619)

Summary: Ms B complained about the way the Council dealt with council tax arrears and a housing benefit overpayment. We cannot find fault with the Council’s actions.

Cherwell District Council (19 001 846)

Summary: There was fault in the Council’s handling of the recovery of a housing benefit overpayment. However, it will now offer the complainant a fresh appeal right to the Tribunal, which is a suitable remedy. The Ombudsman has therefore completed his investigation.

Durham County Council (19 007 287)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to collect council tax arrears through an Attachment of Earnings Order. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Burnley Borough Council (19 008 293)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s council tax account. It is unlikely we would find fault by the Council has caused the complainant significant injustice.

London Borough of Brent (19 009 807)

Summary: The Ombudsman does not have grounds to investigate this complaint from a private tenant about the Council’s failure to recover housing benefit from his ex-landlord, or return the council tax he paid, in respect of his former rented accommodation. This because there is no sign of fault by the Council which has caused the tenant an injustice to warrant our involvement.

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (19 007 556)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss A’s complaint that the Council is seeking to recover an overpayment of housing benefit. This is because it was open to Miss A to appeal to a tribunal and it would have been reasonable for her to do so.

Torridge District Council (18 019 192)

Summary: Mrs J complains about the Council suspending her housing benefit claim and then paying it at a reduced rate. She complains it took three months to get the matter resolved. She had to give the Council information it already had. The Ombudsman does not uphold the complaint.

Allerdale Borough Council (19 007 679)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an alleged breach of his personal information. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Officer is the appropriate body to consider his concerns.

Manchester City Council (19 007 682)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that the Council continued to claim payment of business rates from her despite her many attempts to try to get the problem sorted out. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about council decisions to start court proceedings or their conduct of court proceedings. It is for the court to reach a decision should the Council take bankruptcy or other court proceedings against Miss B.

Harlow District Council (19 007 360)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about an alleged overpayment of housing benefit. This is because the complaint is late and it was reasonable for Miss X to use the appeal rights available to her.

Birmingham City Council (18 012 331)

Summary: Ms X complains the Council mishandled her housing benefit claim leading to rent arrears. The Ombudsman finds there was fault by the Council. The Council has agreed a remedy.

Westminster City Council (18 013 319)

Summary: The complainant received demands for business rates owed by her company and the previous occupant of her business premises. In confusion the complainant mistakenly paid the demand for the previous occupant’s business rates. Quickly realising her mistake, the complainant asked the Council to refund her payment. The complainant says the Council took too long to refund the payment causing inconvenience compounded by paying the refund in two parts. The complainant wants the Council to pay interest on the refund and her solicitor’s costs. The Council says it acted properly in refunding the payment and refused to pay interest or the solicitors’ costs. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault in handling the refund.

Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council (18 014 382)

Summary: Mr X complained the Council were wrong to take recovery action when he made late council tax payments. The Council was entitled to issue a summons and obtain a liability order. However, it should have made contact with Mr X to try to agree a payment plan before it placed the account with bailiffs. The Council agreed to clear all the additional recovery fees to remedy the complaint.

Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (19 000 874)

Summary: The Council failed to end council tax liability when a couple told it they had moved. The couple were in credit with the council tax but the Council, without their knowledge, obtained two liability orders against them. The Council then engaged enforcement agents who sent notices to their current home. This caused distress to them and adversely effected the health condition of one of them. The Council will apologise and pay a financial remedy for the time, trouble and distress it caused.

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (19 005 507)

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse housing benefit and a Discretionary Hardship Payment (DHP). The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there was a right of appeal to a tribunal and there is no evidence of fault in the DHP consideration.

Derby City Council (19 006 603)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms D’s complaint about council tax at her property. Most of the complaint is late and Ms D has or had rights of appeal to an independent tribunal. It is reasonable to expect Ms D to use this right of appeal.

Durham County Council (19 007 223)

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

London Borough of Ealing (19 007 533)

Summary: Mrs X complains that the Council unfairly refused her housing benefit. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there was a right of appeal to a tribunal.

Birmingham City Council (19 002 102)

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council wrongly applying an attachment of earnings order to a council tax debt that did not belong to him. The Ombudsman finds there was fault in how the Council sought to recover the debt and has made recommendations to the Council.