A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

Milton Keynes Council (18 004 072)

Summary: The Council made a serious error when it calculated a Housing Benefit overpayment and issued a notice requiring Mrs X to repay more than £20,000. It did not carry out appropriate checks. That was fault. The Council apologised and rectified the error one month later. It has agreed to make a payment to Mrs X to recognise her distress and anxiety.

London Borough of Merton (18 010 239)

Summary: Mr G complains about the Council’s enforcement action for council tax arrears. And for fees enforcement agents have charged him and accusations an agent made about him. The Ombudsman’s decision is there was no fault by the Council or its enforcement agents.

Northumberland Council (18 018 320)

Summary: Mr C complains about a series of administrative errors made by the Council’s licensing and council tax services. We uphold the complaint, finding those errors while mainly minor have had the cumulative effect of putting Mr C to unnecessary time and trouble. The Council has agreed action to remedy the complaint, set out at the end of this statement.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (19 003 727)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council wrongly held him liable for business rates. The magistrates’ court was better placed to consider the issue and decide if Mr X was liable.

London Borough of Ealing (19 003 489)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council referring a housing benefit overpayment to enforcement agents. The Ombudsman should not exercise his discretion to investigate this complaint. This is because it was received outside the normal 12-month period and it was reasonable for him to appeal the housing benefit overpayment to an independent tribunal in 2015.

Nottingham City Council (18 002 623)

Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her housing benefit payments. The Council was at fault. It took three months to process her change of circumstances between November 2017 and February 2018. The Council was not at fault for how it cancelled Miss X’s housing benefit in June 2018. I recommend the Council pays Miss X £150 to remedy the avoidable financial hardship, stress, uncertainty and time and trouble caused by the Council’s fault.

Aylesbury Vale District Council (19 002 465)

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council has dealt with his business rates. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the matter is out of time. This is also a matter for the courts.

London Borough of Haringey (19 002 878)

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to refund over-paid business rates. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because the complaint is out of time and against a body out of jurisdiction.

Cornwall Council (19 003 076)

Summary: Ms A complains about the way the Council dealt with her housing benefit claim. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because she appealed to a tribunal.

Vale of White Horse District Council (19 003 234)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr Q’s business rates. Much of the complaint is late. In any event, the Council was not responsible for deciding whether Mr Q’s premises should be on the business rating list. And Mr Q’s liability for the business rates was decided in court.

Wiltshire Council (19 001 412)

Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s processes and procedures with regard to council tax reminders. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Blackburn with Darwen Council (19 003 043)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council handled the complainant’s council tax after she moved out a property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Wiltshire Council (19 003 229)

Summary: Mr B complains about the lack of Council support in relation to matters he has raised concerning the police and various other bodies. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because the matters are not those in which the Council has any legal authority to intervene and therefore there is no fault in it failing to do so.

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (19 003 300)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council giving him wrong information about his council tax payments. He also complained about having to pay the tax for services which he does not use. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Medway Council (18 013 869)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment and council tax arrears. This is because it is a late complaint. In addition, the complainant could have used her appeal rights.

London Borough of Merton (19 000 187)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council taking enforcement action against him for a council tax debt he did not owe. He had three visits from enforcement agents. The Council was at fault for an error in calculating council tax support, then taking enforcement action and not resolving the complaint earlier. The Council will pay Mr X £300 to acknowledge the impact on him of its fault.

Blackpool Borough Council (19 003 011)

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s failure to issue her with a business rates bill, pursuing instead her landlord for the debt. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction as the court has determined liability.

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (19 003 319)

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s recovery of an alleged overpayment of housing benefit. This is because if Miss X disagrees with the Council’s decision it is reasonable for her to appeal to the tribunal.