A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

Salford City Council (19 000 540)

Summary: Mr X complains that he received no support for claiming benefits from the Council after he left prison. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (19 000 935)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the erroneous closure of the complainant’s council tax account. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Milton Keynes Council (19 001 263)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about council tax arrears from 2005 to 2007. This is because it is a late complaint.

Watford Borough Council (19 001 547)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council falsely accusing the complainant of shouting during a phone call. This is because the Council has already provided a fair and proportionate response.

Taunton Deane Borough Council (18 010 686)

Summary: There was fault in how the Council dealt with Mrs B’s housing situation. It did not do enough to make sure her emergency accommodation was suitable. This meant that Mrs B’s father found and paid for her emergency accommodation. The Council also failed to set out how she could appeal against decisions on her housing benefit or escalate her complaint. The Council has agreed to pay Mrs B in recognition of the distress it caused her, pay her father the accommodation costs it would have met, and review its processes to make sure this does not recur.

Isle of Wight Council (19 000 273)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with his council tax account after he notified it he had an individual voluntary arrangement (IVA). The Council has now accepted Mr B’s proposed payment plan and further consideration of the complaint would not achieve any more for Mr B.

London Borough of Sutton (19 001 458)

Summary: Ms X complains that the Council did not pay housing benefit for her mother to live in Ms X’s separate property. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the matter was appealed to a tribunal.

Manchester City Council (18 007 485)

Summary: Mr B complains that the Council miscalculated how much council tax he owes, sent contradictory letters about his arrears, failed to treat a telephone call as an appeal about an overpayment of council tax support and failed to consider many of the communications he sent which resulted in enforcement action being taken against him. The Ombudsman has found no fault on the Council’s part.

London Borough of Hackney (18 008 232)

Summary: Mr H complains about the Council’s delay in processing discretionary housing benefit applications. And the way it carried out its homeless prevention duties. The Ombudsman does not uphold Mr H’s complaint.

Luton Borough Council (18 013 132)

Summary: Mr X complains the Council is seeking to recover overpayments of housing benefit it previously considered to be non recoverable. The Council did not agree that all overpayments of housing benefit paid to Mr X were non recoverable. But the Council is at fault as it failed to recover the overpayments from Mr X between 2015 and 2018. Mr X was caused some shock as he received an unexpected bill for the overpayments in 2018. The Council has agreed to remedy Mr X’s injustice by apologising to him and arranging a reasonable repayment plan with Mr X.

Bath and North East Somerset Council (18 013 798)

Summary: Ms B complains about the way the Council has dealt with her council tax accounts. The Ombudsman finds the tone of some of the Council’s correspondence with Ms B was inappropriate. It also failed to keep a record of a telephone conversation. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms B and issue a reminder to staff about keeping a record of telephone conversations. The Ombudsman has found no evidence to support the remainder of Ms B’s complaints.

East Hampshire District Council (18 014 683)

Summary: Mr B complains that a condition on a planning application for an annex, led him to believe it would not be separately liable for Council Tax. He says he has been caused an injustice, as the Valuation Office Agency then decided the annex was separately liable. The Ombudsman does not uphold the complaint.

Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (19 000 413)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this housing benefit complaint. This is because there were appeal rights the complainant could have used and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

London Borough of Barking & Dagenham (19 000 749)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about Council Tax liability. This is because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal if he felt he was not liable for the ongoing Council Tax after he terminated his tenancy at a property he had been renting.

Leeds City Council (19 000 829)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a direct debit for council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

London Borough of Waltham Forest (19 001 204)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council was heavy handed in issuing a court summons for council tax arrears. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (18 010 844)

Summary: Mr C says the Council wrongly used enforcement agents to pursue council tax arrears, as he is a vulnerable debtor. The Council has correctly considered whether it is appropriate to use enforcement agents and has decided it is. The council tax debt is rightly due, and the Council has a duty to recover it. The Council has offered Mr C assistance by entering payment arrangements, referring him for independent debt advice, and sending him application forms for financial assistance. There is no fault by the Council.

Huntingdonshire District Council (18 015 605)

Summary: Mrs B complained about the Council saying she had received too much benefit. The Council was at fault for taking too long to refer Mrs B’s appeal to the Tribunal. That caused Mrs B unnecessarily prolonged uncertainty. To put matters right, the Council agreed to apologise, pay £100, complete an audit to identify similar cases and improve its practices. We do not criticise the Council for not changing some of its decisions about Mrs B’s benefits sooner.

Hartlepool Borough Council (18 016 709)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his application for discretionary housing payments. The Council did not properly decide Mr X’s and some other people’s applications. This caused Mr X a missed opportunity, uncertainty and frustration. The Council agreed to put right the resulting injustice, including by reconsidering Mr X’s and the other affected applications and paying £150.

Watford Borough Council (19 000 529)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about council tax charges on an empty property. This is because the complainant could have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal or because he has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal.

East Riding of Yorkshire Council (19 000 832)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about problems with his council tax account. The Council has withdrawn the summons that was issued and refunded the costs. It is unlikely we can add to this.

Birmingham City Council (18 017 737)

Summary: The Council paid housing benefit to a tenant when it should have paid it to the landlord. The tenant did not pass the money on and left the property. To remedy the injustice it caused, the Council will pay the landlord the same amount it paid the tenant in housing benefit.

Manchester City Council (19 000 735)

Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s decision to hold her liable for business rates on a property after she says the tenancy finished. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because this is a matter for the courts.

Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (19 000 755)

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council placing an overpayment on her council tax account from 2002/3. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because Mrs X exercised her right of appeal and the Council has removed the overpayment.

Northumberland Council (19 000 918)

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to reduce his entitlement to council tax reduction based on his savings. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is a right of appeal to a tribunal.

London Borough of Harrow (19 000 920)

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council is unfairly applying an additional empty homes charge to the council tax on his property. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.