IRRV Alert - week ending 18th June 2021
News
Reports
New benefits and taxation decisions
|
|
A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions |
|
Please note: our decisions are published six weeks 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. East Devon District Council (20 010 422)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Council tax charge as the matter has now been resolved and Mr X has withdrawn his complaint. Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 013 235)
Summary: Mr X complains that the Council did not provide a full explanation of how he became in arrears of council tax. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council. There is also a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal. East Hertfordshire District Council (20 013 879)
Summary: Ms X complains about the way her Universal Credit is calculated. We will not investigate this complaint because Universal Credit is administered by a body out of jurisdiction. Birmingham City Council (20 013 936)
Summary: Mr X complains that the Council sent him an inaccurate council tax bill which caused him enforcement costs. We will not investigate this complaint because he could have appealed to a Valuation Tribunal. Nor was there evidence of fault by the Council. City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (20 014 011)
Summary: We shall not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council refusing to give him a business grant. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council but for which Mr X would have received a grant. Westminster City Council (20 006 661)
Summary: Mr B complained the Council wrongly set up a business rates account for an industrial unit that his business was not occupying. We find the Council was not at fault for setting up the business rates account. However, it was at fault for its communication about whether to put enforcement action on hold. It apologised for this and confirmed it had reminded officers to provide clear instructions to customers. This is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused by fault. Cannock Chase District Council (20 008 989)
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of matters related to his benefits and how it dealt with his complaint about this. We will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome. Sheffield City Council (20 013 929)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council error involving the complainant’s council tax. This is because the Council has offered a fair and proportionate remedy. Buckinghamshire Council (20 013 347)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s recent decision to recover a housing benefit overpayment which arose in 2017. This is because the complainant could have used her appeal rights and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (20 013 482)
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of an application for small businesses affected by COVID-19. This is because Mr X’s claimed injustice stems from his own actions rather than from any fault by the Council.
|
