Benefits and tax archive 2020-2021


Archive has 600 results

  • Birmingham City Council (20 002 548)

    Statement Upheld Council tax 10-Feb-2021

    Summary: There was fault by the Council as it accepts the conduct of advisors on telephone calls was unacceptable. The Council’s apology remedies the anxiety caused to Miss X. There is no evidence of fault on the Council Tax owed or the recovery of arrears from her Universal Credit.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 003 530)

    Statement Upheld Other 10-Feb-2021

    Summary: Mr C complained that he arranged to clear his council tax debt but despite this, his case was passed on to the enforcement stage. He also complained of threatening behaviour by the enforcement agent and his vulnerability was not considered. We find fault because the Council’s enforcement agent failed to act on Mr C’s claim of vulnerability. However, this did not cause him a significant injustice. There is further fault as the enforcement agent failed to respond to Mr C’s email and it incorrectly increased the amount he owed. The enforcement agent apologised to Mr C and corrected his account. The Council has also now waived the outstanding enforcement fees. This is a suitable remedy.

  • New Forest District Council (20 004 707)

    Statement Not upheld Covid-19 10-Feb-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse a Small Business Grant, causing financial difficulties to his business. We find no fault in the Council’s decision making process.

  • Buckinghamshire Council (20 009 785)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 10-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s communication on a council tax matter as there is no evidence of fault causing significant injustice.

  • North West Leicestershire District Council (20 010 419)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 09-Feb-2021

    Summary: Ms X complains that the Council reduced her entitlement to council tax support and she now faces a higher council tax bill. We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and she will have a right of appeal to a Valuation Tribunal.

  • Northumberland County Council (20 006 305)

    Statement Upheld Council tax 09-Feb-2021

    Summary: The Council failed to consider Mr X’s request for discretionary relief from council tax and delayed dealing with his complaint. This is fault The Council has agreed to apologise, clear the debt, and pay Mr X £50.

  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 007 030)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Covid-19 09-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a Government grant for businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

  • London Borough of Harrow (20 009 668)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 09-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate Ms X’s complaint that the Council did not apply a full council tax exemption and refund all the money she paid. This is because Ms X has the right to appeal against this decision to the Valuation Tribunal. We will not investigate the freedom of information request as this would be better dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

  • South Northamptonshire District Council (20 002 281)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 08-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council failed to consider the condition and marketing of her property when deciding not to provide council tax exemption. This is because Mrs X has the right to appeal against this decision to the Valuation Tribunal.

  • Salford City Council (20 002 316)

    Statement Not upheld Council tax 05-Feb-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of two council tax accounts. The Council was entitled to make a determination which of his two properties was his sole or main residence. The Ombudsman cannot intervene in the decision the Council reached.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings