IRRV Alert - week ending 25th 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. Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (19 021 022)
Summary: Ms X complained that the Council should not have passed a council tax debt to bailiffs and they did not acknowledge her vulnerability. She also complained the amount of council tax she was charged was too high. We found the Council should have referred her case to its welfare team to assess if her account should be with bailiffs. In the course of the investigation the Council provided inaccurate information about the bailiff fees that had been applied. It also stated the fees had been withdrawn. This was not the case, only some of the fees were withdrawn. We recommended a payment to Ms X to refund the remaining fees she paid and to recognise the time and trouble she was put to pursuing her complaint. However, we found no fault with the way officers dealt with Ms X or with the way council tax deductions were applied. Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (20 003 257)
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s discretionary grant scheme, leaving his business without financial support and causing increased financial loss. We find no fault in the Council’s decision making process either on its discretionary grant scheme or on its refusal of a grant to Mr X. Buckinghamshire Council (20 012 429)
Summary: Mr and Mrs Y have made a complaint about the Council wrongly suspending their right to housing benefit. The Council was acting on the reliance of information from the Department for Work and Pensions, but it reasonably should have known the information was wrong. This caused Mr and Mrs Y distress and temporary rent arears. The Ombudsman has therefore recommended specific actions to remedy the injustice. Derby City Council (20 012 163)
Summary: We shall not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council not giving her a small business grant. This is because the evidence suggests the Council was not at fault. Newark & Sherwood District Council (20 013 800)
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s housing benefit and council tax support. She has or had a right of appeal to a tribunal against any decision by the Council on her entitlement to benefits. Cheshire East Council (20 007 093)
Summary: Mr B complains the Council has not paid him a full council tax refund. He says the Council will only refund him half and the other half to his former partner, even though he solely paid the tax. The Ombudsman does not find fault in how the Council processed the refund. Brighton & Hove City Council (20 007 510)
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to ask the Valuation Office Agency to revalue his property for council tax and its poor communications, resulting in debt, distress, time and trouble. We find no fault in the Council’s decision making or in its communications with Mr X. London Borough of Brent (20 013 665)
Summary: We shall not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council refusing to give Mr X a business grant. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.
|
